-180 votes

Why I intend to vote for Mitt Romney for president.

This will get shot down by most here and to be perfectly honest, I understand. If you want to vote for Gary Johnson or Virgil Goode that is your business. But, I would like to voice the reasons why I will be voting for the Romney/Ryan ticket in November and will encourage everyone I meet who intends to vote, to do the same.

I had hoped that once Romney won the nomination that Ron Paul supporters would just let the presidential race go and concentrate their efforts on funding the campaigns of the dozens of Liberty candidates we have around this country this year on state ballots. Kurt Bills could sure use our help, but, because he and most other Ron Paul-endorsed candidates are supporting the Republican nominee, many Paul supporters now want nothing to do with them - which is why we have to keep talking about the sorry choices we have for president this November.

I will be voting for Mitt Romney because I believe Barrack Obama is THE worst president in U.S. history. He makes Keynes look like a Monetarist. Romney and his mushy, moderate supporters make me sick, but, it's either a mushy, moderate, status quo president, or an Alinsky radical. I will hold my nose any day of the week for a mushy moderate if it means buying a few more years time. Nixon was no fiscal Conservative nor classical liberal, but, if Hubert Humphrey had won in 1968, the United States today would be a mirror image of the crappy condition of the EU states, only worse (at least they don't have an empire to manage). Nixon managed to buy the Conservative movement time - time to build at the grassroots and eventually take the White House in 1980 and hold it for 8 years, not to mention dominating local politics.

We're not going to force the GOP to embrace us by giving the Kenyan fascist, wannabe socialist four more years. That will only cause them to hate us more and want us out of their party even more.

I'm 21 years old and a junior in college. Lord-willing, I have most of my whole life ahead of me in this country and I care too much for the U.S. and my future to do anything that could potentially give Barrack H. Obama, whose policies, agenda, and unconstitutional shenanegins make Lincoln look like Jefferson four more years to finish transforming America into his father's dreams.

I'm sorry if you disagree, but, it's Romney or Obama and I would take 20 years of the former before accepting one more year of the latter.

In Liberty, Dixie-Paleocon

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

I wasn't replying to you.

I was being accused of not being a Ron Paul supporter in the first place. I'll worry about taking on the Rothchilds after their puppet Obama is out and their puppet Romney is in.

you'll worry about the Rothchilds

after you vote the Rothchilds in?

makes no sense to me...

look, we need a hard reset in this country and it's coming one way or another. Being a young man as you have pointed out, wouldn't you want to just get it over with? why prolong it?

once you understand the inevitability of the coming crash, ask yourself, who do you want to preside over it?

the obvious communist, worst president ever, who only has 4 more years?

or a slightly watered down version of the former, with a white face, who will soothe the population into thinking he is one of us, and do it for 8 years?

That was obvious

that you were defending your being a RP supporter. That's exactly why I responded... because you have skewed ideas of what it means to be a supporter.

It's not about money. It's about spreading the support. (I don't fully agree that spreading the message will accomplish anything tangible.) It's about instilling the principles behind the message into people so that they can make the right decisions henceforth and when confronted about said decisions, they will propagate them to the next person and so on.

Tossing those principles out the window just because our guy didn't get the nod to go to the head of the most corrupt party is not a stand that's based on anything lasting. You are arguing how to help decide which of two evil candidates will get elected when there is no difference. Not a shred of it. Both will get involved in Syria when the bankers say so. Both of them will put a fed chairman in place who will print money when the bankers want it. Both will escalate the process of top-down rule via signing statements and regulator codes that are not supported by laws. These are the underlying problems we face today. Taxes, the economy, smaller government, less regulation (HA, like that's gonna happen!) and every other fad problem are all results of the higher level problems. Neither of these two or any other establishment candidate will ever tackle the root problems so it has become OUR mission. That is what most people see as supporting the movement.

This should have been DP101, right after orientation.

I'm a Ron Paul supporter, not a Ron Paul cultist.

The reason why Libertarians are really no where near accomplishing their goals than they were forty years ago is because they expect to overturn the apple cart overnight. That will never ever happen. It took Progressives four long, patiently-fought decades before they took over the country and the only way they were able to take over the White House in 1932 was because they were willing to settle for small victories here and there and we're even willing to support candidates that were not Progressive, but, would do things in office that were Progressive.

If we're going to be successful, we're going to have to be willing to vote for peoria who are not libertarians, but, will do libertarian things while in office. Repealing Obamacare and cutting our ridiculously high corporate tax are only two of quite a few libertarian things that non-libertarian Romney will do.

I don't care what party someone is from.

I'd support Dennis Kucinich, Gary Johnson, Ron Paul, Rand Paul or Shaq if they stood by the principles of the Constitution and Liberty for the people. With those principles, you don't get compromise and you don't have your freedoms whittled away at.

Maybe you haven't noticed but TPTB don't take huge chunks of power all at one time. They nibble here and sneak in a bite there. It takes long periods for each small step. And the process works the same way. They let 80% of the House and 40% of the Senate rail against some bad new bill and then they make a deal with the 31% House stand-outs in return for some other bill they really want. So this one ends up 49% -51% overall and gets passed. Then when the next one comes along, the 'swayed politicians' slots are filled with a different 30%, this time maybe from the Senate, so that the previous traitors can redeem themselves in your eyes. It's always a different group of swing votes and you always forgive them.

Well, it's absolutely no difference in the White House. Depending on popular support (which is regardless of actual policy - it's more about looks and speaking manner), the election may be given to an incumbent or a challenger, but it will always be a choice between two bought-and-paid-for puppets of TPTB and they will always do two things.

They will say whatever keeps their public opinion high and they will do whatever keeps the banks and mega-CEOs happy. This is ALL YOU NEED TO KNOW about US politics. Not one dang thing more is needed to know how to place your support.

In other words, everything you said Romney will or won't do which supposedly makes him so much better than Obama is a flat out lie. If the banks want it, he will do it. He will just justify it some creative way so you still think it wasn't his fault. You simply have to accept that he's nothing but a liar and a puppet. Heck, he can't even tell the truth about his record, his plan or his opponent so why would anyone trust him on his actions? That's the definition of crazy.

To win this game, we have to unite behind one solution. I don't care what it is but for me, it must adhere to two aspects. It must stand on the Constitution and sound principles (the kind we teach our young kids) and it must be a united front where it pulls the most support from all parties, groups, races, classes and geographies across the board. Anything less and I won't have any room to complain because I would be part of the problem.

Aside from that, I think there is a whole lot of things we can still do to turn this thing around. Check out my two latest posts and see if they follow mainstream or principles and then ask yourself if they provide working solutions under the current situation or if they give a bunch of feel-goods to the people.

Yet...

you're now going to vote for the man who reduced that $2,300 to pointless sunk cost.

I don't play, I commission the league.

Reactionary

Your solution is reactionary at best.

The reality is, you are choosing to have a blue boot on your neck for 4 years versus an 8 year stint with a red boot on your neck.

The end result between these two are the same. These two candidates are equivalent. Ones just black and blue and the other is red and white.

Another way to look at it, you are young. Would you rather suffer until you are 25 or until you are 29?

The fundamental difference between

BO and MR us that BO is an ideologue. MR us not, nor has he ever been. With enough pressure, Romnry will audit the Fed, stay out of any more wars, call off the EPA and the FDA, not to mention the fact that taxes will be lower and the market less regulated under Romney. Obama wants to bring back the New Deal. Romney just wants to be president. Both are corrupt, ruthless, highly partisan, and economically illiterate, but, what drives O is a dangerous ideology, what drives R is pure ambition.

No thinking person would ever

No thinking person would ever vote for Mitt Romney.

Resist the temptation to feed the trolls.

ROMNEY?

Anybody who's paid ANY attention to what Mitt has done, particularly during this disgusting display of a so-called convention, could NEVER VOTE MITT. Why is this post even here?
Is it a joke or what?

We had SOME proof, but RNC does not care about Rules n Laws- they just break and then change 'em to suit whomever (not PAUL).

I don't vote based on spite.

I vote based on strategy and ideology.

Then do what you can that Romney is defeated

From a strategic point of view it is better when Romney loses, because:
1. The GOP has to experience that the liberty wing is necessary to win.
2. When the sh.. hits the fan it will be blamed on "the market" and "capitalism" if Romney is president at the time.
3. It is better when president and congress majority belong to different parties, to slow down the leviathan.

UFOs are real
4 Hour Witness DVD (radar operators, pilots, scientists, military)
Part 1: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ud49Gh9yYLs
Part 2: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kpHAxxRKksQ

You're Wasting Your Vote, Dixie

Mitt Romney is the Lee Harvey Oswald of American politics. A patsy set up to fail, and fortunately for the elite masterminding all of this, to much of an egotist to even see this obvious truth.

What's the truth? America is NEVER going to elect a mormon president. Period.

There are UNCOUNTABLE reasons not to vote for this phony pusbag, but this is the reason the brain dead American electorate will use.

The RNC snub of the greatest American statesman since Thomas Jefferson guarantees Obama 4 more years. Sorry, that's just the way it is.

We can only hope the annihilation of the American middle class and the end of American sovereignty doesn't occur before the next four years are up.

And after four more years of this socialist horse manure, MANY more Americans are going to responding to the call to liberty.

WE THE PEOPLE need to stay busy, on message, and in position offer clear alternatives.

This election is already over, Dixie. Look forward. Try picturing yourself in a local office at 25.

Your country needs you.

Thanks for the comment.

I wish more DPers had your attitude on moving forward.

You just didn't.

You just didn't.

I don't have any other choice.

It's Romney or four more long years of Obama.

Of course we have other choices

Robama or Omoney is the same evil. Think outside the box.

From a fatalistic point of view they are the same

evil. Ron Paul seems to be taking that view and frankly, if I were him, I wouldn't feel any different. Thirty tears of beating your head against a wall can easily cause you to become cynical.

But, this isn't like it was in 2000. There are ten times as many Ron Paul Republicans now than there were then. Romney won't have the support to pull the big-govt. shenanigans Bush dud because he won't get the necessary support from Congress. Romney's problem isn't what he'll go as president, but, rather the fact that he won't do enough to repeal big government.

The big issue - the cornerstone issue is the Suoreme Court. If Obama gets to finish restructuring it, it wouldn't do any good if Napolitano or Rand Paul did get elected.

a potential 8 more years of

a potential 8 more years of Obama vs another 4 years of Obama...I'll take the latter.

What guarantee is there that we won't get

a worse Democratic president elected in 2016? Especially if the economy picks up by then?

I'll take 4 years of Obama

Than a Dictator Romney... I rather Obama take the blame when this country/Economy collapse than someone who is thought of as a free market guy.

So, do yo want 8 years of Romney?

Or 8-12 years of Keynesian Democratic administrations?

This country's economy is not going to collapse

within the next four years. The country is slowly but steadily recovering economically. Unemployment is dropping below 8% in most states run by fiscal Conservatives and will continue to drop nationwide over the next hour years. If O gets a second term, Bernanke will start pumping more money into the economy, creating another mini bubble. The next serious economic downturn won' be for another four to seven years. The economy eon't actually crash as long as the dollar remains the reserve currency. A dollar crash could be 15-20 years away.

If Obama gets a second term, he will leave office with the economy in a little better shape than it is today. The Democrats will point to the artificially-created recovery by the Fed as a Democratic success and another Democratic Keynesian will likely get elected in 2016.